this post was submitted on 09 Jul 2023
98 points (100.0% liked)

World News

38520 readers
2886 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 16 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (3 children)

So.. cp with extra steps? Sometimes articles really go far not to call things what they are

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

UK law is a bit interesting in this regard so I don't fully blame them for avoiding the term. Since they could have been fucking legally and they could be joining the armed forces at 16. So by extension we are okay with children fighting our wars and fucking their grandpas, but not distributing nudes. I'd absolutely expect these to be used in their defence when they go to court. Maybe this changes something and we can finally make 18 a hard line. But I doubt it. I don't think this person will go to jail, especially since they can afford lawyers.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (2 children)

This is it.

I've had an awful experience recently with an ex-friend, caught having an "affair" with his 16yr old employee. He's mid 40s. Turns out, the only illegal part is that there's pictures. He can fuck girls still at school legally, but he can't send her or request any pictures. It's insane.

Another layer is that the age of consent rises 18, but ONLY if you're in a school, healthcare, care-taking, Religion or sports club setting. According to the law, being her Boss doesn't mean he's in a Position of Trust or a Position of Authority over her. Yet, he plainly is.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

This is fucked.

[–] dudebro -2 points 1 year ago

Some women like men in positions of authority.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Is it if the teen in 17? What's the law in UK?

[–] BeardyGrumps 8 points 1 year ago

As I understand it 16 is the legal age of consent. So a pensioner can have sex with a 16 year old and no legal laws are broken. (Unless the elder is a teacher, sports tutor, medical professional of the tenager). What is illegal though is to ask for or send explicit photographs of someone before the age of 18..

Also the Sun newspaper is a hypocritical shit rag. They were printing topless photos of Sam Fox on their daily page 3 ‘feature’ when she was 16…..

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] JackFrostNCola 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Child pornography. Usually abbreviated so you dont get put on any 'lists' for mentioning it.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Ah right never twigged thanks, with lass being 17. Thanks for risking the list ha.

[–] Zirconium 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

There is a new name for it: CSAM. Both used are fine though

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

The idea behind calling it CSAM is that "porn" has become synonymous with something desirable - foodporn, earthporn as examples.

Child porn needs to keep it's status as abhorrent, however the term is changing its nature (as language can).

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Seeming more and more likely it's Hue Edwards I guess

[–] [email protected] -3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

18 should be the minimum age of consent, I would also say people before 20 are basically children, the hard-line is uneasy to draw but the vulnerable people should be protected.

load more comments
view more: next ›